RE: 'Hard Top' returns to Land Rover Defender

[anonymous-user]

DoubleD said:

300bhp/ton said:

DoubleD said:

Ok, I will re word my question.

You said that the Defender should be different to how it now is, why should it be different? What's wrong with the new Defender?

Either the name or everything.

As said, if it was called 'Defender Sport' or 'Discovery'. I'd have no issues with it at all. Being called a 'Defender' means something to a lot of people. And this new vehicle just doesn't fit that description/expectation. At least for me, and if you look about for quite a few others. Even on PH, but head over to some Land Rover forums or other 4x4 interest sites. And there are quite a few who share similar views.

And ultimately, so did a Mr Ratcliffe I suspect, else another heavily talked about vehicle on here this week, simply wouldn't exist at all.

You say that everything is wrong? You would change the lot?

What is actually wrong with the car?

Probably that he can't afford one. If he could it would be the best thing since sliced bread.

[300bhp/ton]

NomduJour said:

2xChevrons said:

I believe that by 2016 only one part fitted to the Defender was literally the same as on a Series vehicle, as in had the same part number on the official LR records and was considered entirely and wholly interchangeable, and it was the cleat for the rear tilt securing rope/bungee that rivetted onto the rear tub on the Soft Top/Truck Cab/Double Cab models. I think it was the filler plug for the front axle swivel housings which was the same part all the way from 1948 to the 2002 Defender facelift when they finally redrew it to use a metric spanner.

I think there’s a U-section pressing under the rear arch that remained the same from the beginning to the end.

Re names, the 90 actually had a 93” wheelbase.

Edited by NomduJour on Thursday 2nd July 17:23

Well 92.9” if you are being pedantic

[300bhp/ton]

DoubleD said:

You say that everything is wrong? You would change the lot?

What is actually wrong with the car?

I’m pretty sure you must know my feelings on it already

As a Discovery or Defender Sport I wouldn’t change anything. Other than maybe the option of a manual gearbox and maybe a V8 engine.

As a Defender, like many I’d want something much nearer in design and execution to the Grenadier, Wrangler JL or past Defender.

[Sensei Rob]

It's all right, but it ain't no Grenadier!

[DoubleD]

300bhp/ton said:

DoubleD said:

You say that everything is wrong? You would change the lot?

What is actually wrong with the car?

I’m pretty sure you must know my feelings on it already

As a Discovery or Defender Sport I wouldn’t change anything. Other than maybe the option of a manual gearbox and maybe a V8 engine.

As a Defender, like many I’d want something much nearer in design and execution to the Grenadier, Wrangler JL or past Defender.

JLR would have spent a considerable amount of time and resources, deciding which direction was best to go, and they chose to go with the car we have now.

You might not like that decision, but the Defender is there car to do as they see fit.

Time to move on.

[anonymous-user]

300bhp/ton said:

Well 92.9” if you are being pedantic

Well if we are being [b] pedantic [b] the wheel base actually depends on the ride height at any given moment!

With leading and trailing arm suspension the wheel base grows as the ride height falls, and as you go round a corner and the body leans, the wheel base is different on either side of the vehicle. And you wonder why defenders and similar live axle vehicles handle so badly eh... ;-)

[595Heaven]

Max_Torque said:

camel_landy said:

300bhp/ton said:

As said, if it was called 'Defender Sport' or 'Discovery'. I'd have no issues with it at all. Being called a 'Defender' means something to a lot of people. And this new vehicle just doesn't fit that description/expectation.

Tough... It's not your baby.

Start a new thread and moan in there.

M

i now have weird visoins of 300 hiding in the bushes in public car parks and every time a new defender comes in and parks he sneaks out and sticks his own little "sport" badge on the back under the Defender one then siddles away laughing manically to himself........ :-)

It’s begun...

Seriously though, I can't believe that your opinion is seemingly totally swung by the name. Would you still like the Jimny if it was called something else?

Edited by 595Heaven on Thursday 2nd July 19:54

[2xChevrons]

Max_Torque said:

Well if we are being [b] pedantic [b] the wheel base actually depends on the ride height at any given moment!

With leading and trailing arm suspension the wheel base grows as the ride height falls, and as you go round a corner and the body leans, the wheel base is different on either side of the vehicle. And you wonder why defenders and similar live axle vehicles handle so badly eh... ;-)

Is this true for a setup like the old Defender?

The actual springs are vertical. So are the dampers on the front. The axles are located by radius arms, trailing arms, a Panhard rod on the front and a A-link on the back.

I'm sure there is some measurable lateral and longitudinal movement of the axles when the vehicle is in motion - if there wasn't it wouldn't need all the locating links - but is it appreciable?

I'm thinking of (perhaps a rather extreme counter-example) of my 2CV where all four wheels are mounted on solid front leading and rear trailing arms mounted at their 'shoulders' at the chassis on big tapered roller bearings. There is no other form of wheel location other than the tracking rods on the front wheels. Combined with 9 inches of wheel travel either side of static and very low rate springs the wheelbase grows by about one inch per person carried, and can differ by more than seven inches side to side during extreme cornering.

Does the same principle apply (but on a much smaller scale, obviously) to a Defender with live axles front and rear? Even though the leading/trailing arms aren't the primary locating component and the springing is vertical? I'd have thought that the wheelbase would remain essentially fixed in comparison. Or is that what a Watt's Linkage (absent on the Defender) is for - to properly resolve all the forces into purely vertical motion?

[anonymous-user]

2xChevrons said:

Max_Torque said:

Well if we are being [b] pedantic [b] the wheel base actually depends on the ride height at any given moment!

With leading and trailing arm suspension the wheel base grows as the ride height falls, and as you go round a corner and the body leans, the wheel base is different on either side of the vehicle. And you wonder why defenders and similar live axle vehicles handle so badly eh... ;-)

Is this true for a setup like the old Defender?

The actual springs are vertical. So are the dampers on the front. The axles are located by radius arms, trailing arms, a Panhard rod on the front and a A-link on the back.

I'm sure there is some measurable lateral and longitudinal movement of the axles when the vehicle is in motion - if there wasn't it wouldn't need all the locating links - but is it appreciable?

I'm thinking of (perhaps a rather extreme counter-example) of my 2CV where all four wheels are mounted on solid front leading and rear trailing arms mounted at their 'shoulders' at the chassis on big tapered roller bearings. There is no other form of wheel location other than the tracking rods on the front wheels. Combined with 9 inches of wheel travel either side of static and very low rate springs the wheelbase grows by about one inch per person carried, and can differ by more than seven inches side to side during extreme cornering.

Does the same principle apply (but on a much smaller scale, obviously) to a Defender with live axles front and rear? Even though the leading/trailing arms aren't the primary locating component and the springing is vertical? I'd have thought that the wheelbase would remain essentially fixed in comparison. Or is that what a Watt's Linkage (absent on the Defender) is for - to properly resolve all the forces into purely vertical motion?

The axles are held to a defender by the front "C" arms and the rear trailing arms:




That means the axles rotate longitudinally around the innner end of those arms. The arms are about 1 m long (bit less on the back iirc) and form the hypotenuse of a triangle, so yes, the axles move front back as they go up/down

(the rear axle is actually also located on its upper point by an upper trailing A arm, so it's true path depends on the intersection, the instantaneous centre of those two geomterical systems)

The springs are soft enough not to care about the longitudinal movement, and the dampers are mounted in large rubber bushes to avoid them getting twisted by the movement. And of course, within normal ride heights, where the leading / trailing arms are close to horizontal, the wheelbase growth as at a minimum. Lifted vehicles are a different matter, and aftermarket arms and chassis brackets are available to restore some of the factory geometry for big lifts

Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 2nd July 20:03

[2xChevrons]

Max_Torque said:

The axles are held to a defender by the front "C" arms and the rear trailing arms:

That means the axles rotate longitudinally around the innner end of those arms. The arms are about 1 m long (bit less on the back iirc) and form the hypotenuse of a triangle, so yes, the axles move front back as they go up/down

(the rear axle is actually also located on its upper point by an upper trailing A arm, so it's true path depends on the intersection, the instantaneous centre of those two geomterical systems)

The springs are soft enough not to care about the longitudinal movement, and the dampers are mounted in large rubber bushes to avoid them getting twisted by the movement. And of course, within normal ride heights, where the leading / trailing arms are close to horizontal, the wheelbase growth as at a minimum. Lifted vehicles are a different matter, and aftermarket arms and chassis brackets are available to restore some of the factory geometry for big lifts

Edited by Max_Torque on Thursday 2nd July 20:03

Thank you - that's all clear now

[sisu]

This thread illustrates every car park of any 4x4 club event or off road launch I have been on.

The guy with a knackered 80s/90s Land Cruiser/Jeep/Nivara/Land Rover (delete as needed) with rope on the roof rack and a snorkel who st talks everything.

Then a guy trailers a purpose built off roader, hand painted in green camouflage that has just the cowl/windsheild from the original towed by the same make/model/condition 4x4 his turns up and it gets personal.

We drive off road in the soft roader/SUV and get to where we need and they go off to find a place to get stuck.

[camel_landy]

sisu said:

This thread illustrates every car park of any 4x4 club event or off road launch I have been on.

M

[DonkeyApple]

PAMF.

Pie Addicted Milatry Fantasists who genuinely think everyone thinks the same as them and that those who don’t are ruining society. Hence the love for the Ineos Defender Pretender, IDP and the fear and loathing for the new Defender which represents a world that they fear and loath.

You only have to see the animosity that pours out against the target consumer of the Defender. The frightened and angry little jabs about it being a dirty foreigner built by a company owned by dirty foreigners (excluding America obviously, there is always a very weird love of guns and bug out equipment and the American way. America good. Not dirty foreigner. )

The generally bemoaning about how everything is over priced and a copy of the original stuff all day, every day and then bizarrely they start spaffing over a £40k+ bug out fantasy wagon that’s such a rip off of the original that even the Chinese are saying ‘Steadynon Jim!’

Anyway, for any of us thinking we might buy an IDP at least we know that when we park it up in public we will see these stormtroopers in waiting as they head towards us thinking they can just talk bks for an hour to some poor victim and almost certainly out walk them in our escape.

The IDP is interesting as it will make a really good gunbus but it’s going to have to have exceptional road manners and crash safety to overcome the fact that I can buy a real classic Defender for half as much and maintain it more easily and not risk being mobbed by specialists.

Conversely, the new Defender can fit almost anyone’s usage needs, almost anywhere, almost any time of year. An extremely practical, versatile, usable and fun looking car for the 21st century, exactly like its parent once was in the 20th century.

And with the huge benefit that bug out waddlers won’t be rushing towards you be repelled by fear and loathing. .

[300bhp/ton]

DoubleD said:

JLR would have spent a considerable amount of time and resources, deciding which direction was best to go, and they chose to go with the car we have now.

You might not like that decision, but the Defender is there car to do as they see fit.

Time to move on.

Doesn't mean I have to agree with there decision. And this, as in 'here'. Is a forum intended for discussion. I don't recall the Posting Rules saying anything about you must always agree with car makers decisions or that you must concede to people who's view is different to yours. Therefore surely the discussions can go on.

And ultimatley it will be time and history that decides how this variant of the Pretender is viewed. Much as it has been for other marques and models, such as:

The Mustang


The Dodge Charger


Chevy Blazer

[camel_landy]

300bhp/ton said:

Doesn't mean I have to agree with there decision. And this, as in 'here'. Is a forum intended for discussion. I don't recall the Posting Rules saying anything about you must always agree with car makers decisions or that you must concede to people who's view is different to yours. Therefore surely the discussions can go on.

With one caveat: Don't hijack threads.

If you want to go 'off-topic', start a new thread.

M

[DoubleD]

300bhp/ton said:

DoubleD said:

JLR would have spent a considerable amount of time and resources, deciding which direction was best to go, and they chose to go with the car we have now.

You might not like that decision, but the Defender is there car to do as they see fit.

Time to move on.

Doesn't mean I have to agree with there decision. And this, as in 'here'. Is a forum intended for discussion. I don't recall the Posting Rules saying anything about you must always agree with car makers decisions or that you must concede to people who's view is different to yours. Therefore surely the discussions can go on.

And ultimatley it will be time and history that decides how this variant of the Defender is viewed.

The new Defender will sell very well as people seem to like it, it will most likely be viewed in a good way.

[Dynamic Space Wizard]

RoverP6B said:

The current car is no Defender. It's a pretender. It's also offensive bordering on criminal

[Bill]

Max_Torque said:

Landrover TIMELINE - from here: https://www.landrover.co.uk/explore-land-rover/one...

SERES 1 1948 -> 1958 (10 years)
SII 1958 -> 1961 (3 years)
SIIA 1961 -> 1971 (10 years)
SIII 1971 -> 1983/1984 (12 years)
90/110 1983/84 to 1990 (6 years)
Defender 1990 to 2017 (27 years)


Now who can tell me they are suprised the "evolutionary" jump has been the biggest in replacing the classic Defender with the new Defender........

And the Disco has been through 5 generations in the same time.

[RoverP6B]

Bill said:

And the Disco has been through 5 generations in the same time.

Technically only three. The 2003 Discovery was just a second facelift of the 1989 original and still built on a 1970 Range Rover chassis... the D4 was likewise just a facelifted D3. The D5 is only the third all-new Discovery in thirty years - the first two spanned twenty-seven years of production.

[FA57REN]

595Heaven said:

Seriously though, I can't believe that your opinion is seemingly totally swung by the name. Would you still like the Jimny if it was called something else?

Well I still refuse to consider buying a 500 or Mini because to do so would be to concede to the cynical use of heritage to promote cars that have none of the ethos of their predecessors.

At some point one has to draw a line and say "I'm not going to be influenced by marketing psychology"

So yes, the choice of name is important on principle

If JLR had come out with something like a SWB AWD Transit and called it Defender, I'd actually be onboard with that because it instill the values of the predecessor if not the configuration.

Edited by FA57REN on Sunday 5th July 08:03